On 11/29/2016 02:51 AM, Patrick Ohly wrote: > On Mon, 2016-11-28 at 16:35 -0600, Jose Lamego wrote: >> >> On 11/28/2016 03:34 PM, Patrick Ohly wrote: >>> On Mon, 2016-11-28 at 14:28 -0600, Jose Lamego wrote: >>>> Agree. Please provide feedback about below comments and I will submit a >>>> v3 patch. >>>> >>>> On 11/28/2016 01:47 PM, Patrick Ohly wrote: >>>>> On Mon, 2016-11-28 at 10:23 -0600, Jose Lamego wrote: >>>> More than 1 "In-Reply-To" and "References" message headers are in >>>> violation of rfc2822 [1] and may cause that some email-related >>>> applications do not point to the appropriate root message in a >>>> conversation/series. >>> >>> Fixing that makes sense. Just add it as reason and the "why" part is >>> covered. >>> >>>>> And I don't understand why this proposed change has the described >>>>> effect. Does changing the threading parameters change the output of "git >>>>> send-email" and thus indirectly the mail headers of the following >>>>> patches? >>> >>> The "how" part still isn't clear to me. Perhaps I'm just dumb, but would >>> you bear with me and explain a bit more how changing the sending of the >>> cover letter affects sending of the patches? > > I've tried out your proposed change with > bash -x ../poky/scripts/send-pull-request --to=patrick.o...@gmx.de -p > pull-11827 > where pull-11827 is my recent bitbake submission. > > The resulting emails are still broken because that one line that you > modify isn't event used. It's under "if [ $AUTO_CL -eq 1 ]" and I am not > using the -a option that enables that behavior. > > Even when I use -a, the result is still broken. > > The root cause of the problem is that both create-pull-request and > send-pull-request allow git to insert In-Reply-To headers. > > "git send-email --help" explicitly warns about that: > > It is up to the user to ensure that no In-Reply-To header already > exists when git send-email is asked > to add it (especially note that git format-patch can be configured to > do the threading itself). Failure > to do so may not produce the expected result in the recipient’s MUA. > >> What I'm doing >> here is to include no reference to any root message at the first call, >> then including a reference at the second call to the very first message >> in the chain, which is either the cover letter or the patch #1. > > No, that doesn't work. Whether the first call uses --no-thread or > --no-chain-reply-to has no effect whatsoever, because when "git > send-email" only sends a single email, it doesn't add headers, and the > second call was left unmodified in your patch. > You are right, I wrongly tested using patches created with git-format-patch command, and then send-pull-request which produced a correctly created chain with only the first change, but didn't tested creating a pull request in the first place, which is the appropriate.
> The right fix (tested successfully here) is to use --no-thread in the > second call which sends the sequence of patches. I'll send my change > for review separately. > -- Jose Lamego | OTC Embedded Platforms & Tools | GDC
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
-- _______________________________________________ Openembedded-core mailing list Openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org http://lists.openembedded.org/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core